This study was presented during the conference “Production and Carbon Dynamics in Sustainable Agricultural and Forest Systems in Africa” held in September, 2010.

1. Ways Forward – Addressing Climate Change at
Local Levels
Carol J. Pierce Colfer, CIFOR & Cornell University
ABSTRACT: Much of the effort related to climate change has so far focused on assisting governments to reduce emissions. Yet many see
serious dangers in that approach, fearing that the additional funding provided to governments is likely to be used in ways that both adversely
affect the people living in and around forests and fail to reduce emissions. Although there are important transaction costs involved in working
directly with forest communities, I argue that such an approach is in fact the one most likely to succeed.
Addressing the problems brought about by climate change will require solutions that vary by location and by population. The specific climatic
changes in any given locale can only be predicted, at this stage, in very gross terms; and we know from decades of ‘development assistance’
that human systems are also complex and dynamic, making predictions and/or standardized planning equally difficult. Many groups around the
world have been experimenting with facilitation, social learning, and adaptive collaborative management to bring about locally relevant change
by local communities. Such approaches require significant changes in attitude, e.g.
 From ‘we [scientists, researchers, development practitioners] know best’ to ‘let’s figure this out together’ [with local people and local
government actors],
 From seeing a ‘failure’ as something to fear to seeing it as a learning opportunity,
 From dealing with elites to catalyzing social action among various groups (including women, despised ethnic groups, occupational
groupings, youth)
 From hierarchical attitudes to more democratic ones
We know from experience that such attitudinal changes are difficult; and that working with communities takes skills that many in the climate
change community do not have. To do this right, we’ll need to train cadres of skilled facilitators who can study and understand local cultural
systems while they motivate and mobilize the various segments of forest communities to address climate change issues. At the same time,
such cadres will need to serve as communication nodes linking local folks to broader sources of funding and expertise. Long term funding
(10-15 years) is a necessity. Social change, essential in combating climate change, takes time–something we’ve learned from our experience
with adaptive collaborative management.
We need to factor in mechanisms (like social learning, participatory action research, adaptive collaborative management, and more effective
devolution) to deal with the dynamism and complexity of the issues that need to be addressed. We need to mobilize the creativity, energy, and
motivation of people living in and around forests; and to do that we must take seriously their own interests, concerns, and capabilities, as well
as our own. Without that, we run the risk of repeating the failures that have characterized so many development and conservation efforts to
date.

2. Ways Forward - Addressing
Climate Change at Local Levels
Special thanks to Bruno Locatelli
for his help!

3. Adaptation and Mitigation
 Two approaches to climate change, operating at
different scales
 Mitigation: focuses on and responds to global interests
 Adaptation: focuses on and responds to local needs
 Clear need to link the two
 Strengthen sustainability of CDM, REDD+ efforts
when people’s vulnerability is reduced.
 Adds legitimacy to CDM/REDD+ efforts
 Additional funds available for maintaining people’s
well being

4. Mitigation, in Context
Key Fears
 REDD and Funds given
to governments could be
badly used (land grabs,
resettlement,
corruption)
 adverse effects on people,
cultures,and environments
 Failure to reduce
emissions

5. Adaptation in Context
Key Fears
 Climate change will increase people’s current vulnerability
(to climate variability, economic or political crisis, etc.)
 adverse effects on people,cultures,and environments
 Top-down adaptation processes
 Heightened transaction costs
 failure to reduce vulnerability

6. Key Realities for Adaptation
and Mitigation
 Need to find solutions at local scale (& related
transaction costs)
 Geographic variability
 Variability over time
Under-recognized Realities:
 Power, strengths ,value of
ordinary people & system
 Population growth
(2-2.8 annually in Africa)

7. Difficulties of Prediction
 Adaptation: Local climatic impacts and vulnerability
can only be predicted in gross terms
 Mitigation: Effects of REDD+ initiatives are uncertain
(e.g., leakage, elite capture, distributional and gender
effects, rights deprivation)
making predictions and/or standardized
planning equally difficult

8. From Diagnosis to
[Partial] Prescription
The need: “…to balance attention to diagnosis of
forest governance problems with attention to what
to do about them. We would all go to the doctor less
often if he or she was good at telling us what was
wrong with us, but never had any prescriptive advice
for cure.”
Frances Seymour,
Director General, CIFOR

9. Collaborative Experimentation with Local
Communities –> Empowerment +
Response to Local Variability
 Facilitation
 Social Learning
 Adaptive Collaborative Management
To address some of the
problems encountered in
conventional‘development
assistance’

10. Centrality of Attitudinal Change
[including our own]
Attitudes affect people’s willingness/ability to change
(as needed to address climate change)

11. 4 Attitudinal Changes Needed (1)
1. from‘we [scientists, researchers, development
practitioners] know best’ to ‘let’s figure this out together’
[with local people and local government actors]
2. From seeing a‘failure’ as something to fear to seeing it as a
learning opportunity

12. 4 Attitudinal Changes Needed (2)
3. From dealing only with elites to catalyzing social action among
various groups (including women, despised ethnic groups,
occupational groupings, youth)
4. From hierarchical attitudes to more democratic ones

13. Mechanisms to ‘Factor in’
 social learning, participatory action research, adaptive
collaborative management, more effective devolution
To help us deal with the dynamism and complexity of the
issues we need to address
 Attending to population issues (reduce growth rates,
improve women and girls’ lives, access female creativity)
For both environmental
and human well being

14. Needs
 Develop new skills
 Skilled facilitators at all levels
 Study and understand local systems
 Motivate and mobilize local actors
 Serve as liaisons to broader efforts/resources
 Longer term funding to maintain the level of effort, to follow
up on local plans
 Grant greater local level
autonomy (freedom to fail)

15. General (Nested) Process
 Work with multiple stakeholders to define long term goals
 Define small action groups
 Facilitate an iterative process (analyze, plan, implement,
monitor/evaluate, revise plans)---with long term goals in
mind
 Follow up with linking functions to
needed outside resources (info, funds,
networks)

16. Ways to Improve on Current Practice
 Factor in more explicit attention to power differentials
(both within communities and between communities and
other actors)
 Develop incentive structures to level playing fields
 Coordinate better among sectors (facilitation)
 Ensure longer term, sustained funding

17. Ultimately,
 We need to mobilize the creativity, energy, and motivation of
people living in and around forests;
 to do that we must take seriously their own interests,
concerns, and capabilities, as well as our own.
 Without that,we repeat the failures that have characterized so
many development and conservation efforts to date

18. Thanks for your
Attention!